Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Classification/Division Essay
Polarized Politics
The political spectrum is not so much a line with people on either side, it is more like a
web, with people falling in all different parts with different ideas about how the government
should function and what its duties really are. The ways in which people define themselves
politically is endless, with the three most mainstream groups being the Republicans, the
Democrats, and the independents. These three groups all seem to have their reasoning for why
they are the party that will save America and ensure prosperity to all. Hypocrisy within the two
major parties is nearly as plentiful as the reasons they claim they are the saving grace.
The most major difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is their ideas
of how wealth should be redistributed. The Republican party claims to believe in a theory called
trickle-down economics. The money flows from the top to the bottom, as the market innovates
and becomes more efficient the products become cheaper to make and therefore more easily
accessible to the people. The Republican party also states that they are for a smaller
government, with less interference in the lives of the people. At the same time that they spout
the small-government rhetoric, they support an ever-growing military and police force; they do
this in the name of law and order. Another example of hypocrisy seen in this party is even
though they claim that the free market is the answer to any and all problems with the economy,
you rarely see a republican turn down a bill for bailouts for large corporations, they also favor
these large corporations with tax cuts and other special loopholes. These benefits that the large
corporations receive stifle the free market economy by making up and coming businesses
unable to compete with the large corporations who are playing by different rules. The
Republicans claim to be in support of the second amendment, yet a look in the history books will
show that the Republican party has passed some of the most influential gun control legislation
in effect today. The praised Republican Ronald Reagan signed the NFA into law, and the
current president Donald Trump has signed more gun control legislation into law than he has
done to protect gun rights. Yet the Make America Great Again crowd will still sing his praises of
how pro-gun the president is. The promises of the Republican party appeal to those who desire
a strong sense of national security, domestic law and order, and traditional values.
The Democratic Party claims to be the party for the working class. They are in favor of
many welfare programs, such as Obamacare, that the Republicans despise. It is the viewpoint
of the Democratic party that the rich should be taxed more in order to support those in need. A
major concern of the Democratic party is the climate change crisis. They believe that in order to
put a halt to the impending doom of the planet, many regulations and incentives need to be
created in order to stop the destruction of the earth. This, undoubtedly, would put many
American workers out of a job. The Democratic party’s budget for their programs cannot be
supported solely by the rich though, taxes will inevitably go up for the average American as well.
The party recently has taken a stance in opposition to the current form of policing, claiming it is
systematically flawed. At the same time that they declare the misdeeds, dangers, and injustice
of the criminal justice and policing systems, they demand stricter and stricter gun control.
Disarming a population while claiming it is being oppressed by its rulers is quite the conflicting
argument, after all, who enforces gun control legislation? For a group to argue that the
government is so corrupt, and then to turn around and say that they should be the ones in
control of housing, healthcare, and education, is beyond mental gymnastics. The Democratic
party is supported by those who want “equality”; they desire to change for the hope of a better
libertarians to socialists, the variety of ideas and opinions found in independents spans from
complete government control to no government at all. Even though they have diverse
viewpoints independents could all probably agree that Democrats and Republicans are two
sides of the same coin, who will most likely never bring about any real change. That is where
the similarities end though, as for some the answer to the injustices of the world now is to truly
limit the size of the government, while others believe that more government control would help
to make life equal for everybody. Each independent will have his or her own viewpoints on
participating in the electoral politics of today. Some will claim that voting third party is how the
change will be brought about, while others understand that it is nearly impossible for a third-
party candidate to be elected into high ranking positions. This will not stop the voting
independent from voting though, as to someone such as him that believes in democracy, voting
is how change is brought about. The second argument used by those in opposition to voting
would be that it symbolizes a consent to be governed, and they do not wish to be governed by
those that solely seek power. The draw to the independent side of the spectrum is seeing that
no matter which of the two parties are in power, no issues will be resolved, the problems we
face today are not a culmination of just the Republican party or just the Democratic party, but
anymore. People root for their party as if it were a sports team. Americans choose a side and
stick with it, no matter the amount of contradicting viewpoints a party will spew out, the loyal
voter base will refuse to call out any faults of their party because it would put their opponent in a
better light. The personal character seems to play a bigger role in politics these days than does
actual policy. The political spectrum can be split up into countless ideologies, each fighting for
what they believe in, yet nobody ever seems to be pleased; this begs the question: Are the
answers to our problems so clear cut as what people believe them to be?
1. Name two specific things that you liked about this essay.
a. I really loved the formality of Cullen’s essay, and it made me feel as if I was reading his
paper for a research assignment in Government.
b. I liked the descriptive words he used to make the essay sound as professional as it was.
2. Does this essay have a thesis statement? If so, write the thesis here.
“ The ways in which people define themselves politically is endless, with the three most
mainstream groups being the Republicans, the Democrats, and the independents. “
Anyone who lives in America. Cullen is explaining ideas and groups of people who are
interested in our government.
To inform the reader on the ways that the American people tend to define themselves in regards
to political stance.
5. How many categories does the author use to divide the topic? What are those categories?
6. Are there categories that you can think of that the author has missed in his or her division of
the topic? Write them here.
No!
7. Are the categories well-organized? Is there a category that doesn't belong in this
classification?
Yes! They’re very well organized. I can tell which body paragraph correlates with the specific
groups mentioned. All categories belong where
8. Are there grammatical or mechanical errors? If so, please provide assistance on this sheet of
paper.
There are a few sentences that I believe could be shortened down and separated in the body
paragraphs. Remember to go back through to check and see if anything looks like it’s going on
for too long! I went back and fixed all of the grammatical errors I saw at first glance. :-)
Yes. I also really love how Cullen used a rhetorical question as his closer. It really left me
thinking about how our government truly impacts us as citizens.
Cullen did a great job classifying the political stances of our country all while including sub
details, and the only thing I can think to work on is grammar usage and shortening sentences.
Otherwise, a lovely essay to read! :-)